Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Fiction
By Stanley Green
Double Standards
The Federal Judiciary has double standards in upholding FRCP Rule 3 in respect to civil vs. criminal litigations. For example: In civil litigations judges have upheld the legal rights of both plaintiffs and defendants to file their complaints and counter complaints without any impartiality. Conversely, in criminal litigations criminal court judges have upheld the legal right of plaintiffs to file complaints, yet has not upheld the legal rights of criminal defendants to file counter complaints. The latter is unfair and impartial treatments. It places defendants at greater disadvantage. The courtroom docket will avail the bench details about the plaintiffs criminal complaint. Yet, the docket will not entail the defendants counter criminal complaints against plaintiffs. The repercussion is criminal trials have been one-sided. The defendants have stood trial answering complaints of the plaintiff. Yet, not a single plaintiff has ever stood trial to answer the complaints of the defendants. As a result, all criminal trials have been unfair.
Muhammad Ali
Muhammad Ali has coined the saying that the best defense is a good offense. FRCP Rule 3 is an offensive assault. If legal parties neglect to exercise his or her right to file complaints with the court, then he or she is at the mercy of opponents. Entering a courtroom battle is identical to a boxing match. The party has the right to mix counter punches or the party can weave and bob trying to duck and dodge opponents. Ali had the grace to float like a butterfly and sting like a bee. He defended his championship title as a professional prize boxer. Criminal defense lawyers should learn a lesson that defend dosent necessarily mean to become a punching bag. Rather, defend means to exercise all the rules of the contest to avoid defeat. If the best way to win a criminal defense trial is to wage an assault, then by all means exercise FRCP Rule 3.
Fact or Fiction
I hope I have settled the issue whether right to a fair trial is fact or fiction. The answer is contingent upon whether were talking about civil or criminal cases. In civil cases it may be fact. Yet, in criminal cases it is a fiction. This means that the ethics and integrity of our judiciary process has been tarnished. Criminal defense attorneys have committed flagrant violation withholding legal counsel that may have won their clients acquittal. Legal malpractice is the only way to construe criminal defense attorneys keeping privy FRCP Rule 3. Professional attorneys have a duty to advise clients the law.
Petition Drive
Directed to U.S. Attorney Eric Holder We the People of the United States petition our United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) to remunerate each criminal defendant, who has been deprived of his or her legal right to exercise Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (FRCP) Rule 3, with a Right to fair trial reparation settlement. If you and/or family members have been convicted for felony offenses, but have never been advised by officers of the court (criminal court judges, prosecutors, criminal defense attorneys or public defenders) concerning your legal rights to file counter criminal complaints, then you and/or your family members may be entitled to join our class action lawsuit Right to a fair trial reparation settlement. This may help you and/or your family members recoup financial damages for unfair convictions. The Judiciary Branch owns a legal obligation to warrant each criminal defendants right to a fair trial no matter what the criminal indictments may have been. In order for a trial to be deemed fair, the court must honor the legal rights of the defendants to file counter criminal charges against the plaintiffs.